Talks continue to inch forward

NEW YORK — For a second straight day, the National Hockey League met with its Players’ Association in an attempt to solve a lockout that has now stretched into 2013. For a second straight day one side carefully planned before a full session; for a second straight day that session was delayed so both sides could more fully prepare for it. And for a second straight day, one side — the league, this time — made a proposal.

When asked if the gap between the two sides was narrowing, he said, “In our response there were certain things the players’ association asked for that we agreed to, there were some thing that we moved in their direction, and there were certain things where we said no.

“We’re trying to get an agreement.”

Both NHLPA executive Don Fehr and Bettman said they expected to meet again Wednesday, after the union had a chance to fully analyze the league’s proposal.

If there is going to be a new collective bargaining agreement, this is how it will proceed. They are handling this phase of negotiations like a bomb that needs to be carefully defused, wire by wire. Up until Tuesday, it went like this: The owners made a comprehensive offer to the players last week, and moved slightly on contract term limits, variance of salary increases from year to year, a few other things. It was comprehensively leaked to the media. The players went through it line by line, in concert with the NHL, clarifying and explaining, poking and prodding. This took three days. It was thorough.

Monday, the players presented a counter-proposal that moved slightly toward the owners, but the details were locked in a cone of silence; all the NHL would allow is that there was movement, and that gaps remained. The two sides met for about three hours, including breaks to talk among themselves, and parted with cautious words from their leaders to the media, who waited outside in the cold wind on Sixth Avenue. The league spent much of the next 24 hours going over that offer, in concert with the NHLPA. On Tuesday morning they exchanged information in smaller face-to-face meetings, or over conference calls conducted with the parties just a few blocks away.

A full bargaining session began Tuesday at NHL headquarters at 9 p.m., several hours after it had been initially expected, and the league spent 45 minutes presenting its proposal.

Among the various issues, apparently pensions had become an issue again during afternoon meetings — previously it had been close to a done deal — but revenue sharing was close.

Beforehand, though, the proceedings were cloaked in a tentative and fragile sense of hope that there might be a path to a deal here. No details of the PA’s offer leaked out, which was a first over the course of these negotiations. With Bettman confirming the league’s Jan. 19 deadline for the beginning of a 48-game season — the minimum the NHL says it will support, and requiring a deal to be struck by Jan. 11 — the two sides appear to be proceeding with extreme care.

The last time the negotiations felt like this, of course, were back on Dec. 4 when deputy commissioner Bill Daly and union deputy Steve Fehr stood side-by-side at the end of the first day of direct player-owner talks. Two days later the talks exploded.

There is still room for that to happen, but the margin for error diminishes by the day. Players want a cap on escrow, to protect their paycheques in the event that revenues suffer in the wake of the league’s second lockout since 2004; the league has strongly opposed a cap on escrow. There remain other outstanding issues, though the financial basics are in place.

The players can also officially file for disclaimer of interest Wednesday, which would introduce the possibility of antitrust law being brought to the table; aside from the mutually assured destruction of walking away from a season, the disclaimer of interest is seen as the biggest weapon the players have left. The league has expressed a willingness to continue negotiating should that occur, however.

There were always two big components of this process. One was the issues themselves, and how far apart the players and the league were; the other was the manner in which they negotiated, with Fehr purposefully refusing to use the league’s framework in his proposals. Both components were, and are, required to strike a deal.

What we have seen the past few days in New York has been a conciliatory tone on the process, and marginal progress on the issues. They are negotiating within the same basic framework, using common points. But even if these two sides refrain from the temptation of one more walk-away, one more dramatic exit from the stage, the gaps on the issues will require agreement.

We have yet to see public optimism, though the occasional positive whisper has quietly floated around. A truce only lasts as long as it is better than the alternative.

After graduating from the University of British Columbia, Bruce Arthur joined the Post in 2001 as a sports reporter. After covering the Toronto Raptors, he became the paper's basketball columnist in 2005... read more, its Toronto columnist in 2007, and its national columnist in 2008. His work currently appears across the Postmedia chain three times a week. Arthur was born in Vancouver, is married, and lives in Toronto.View author's profile